The Keep Mark Neeld Thread

[jumbo returns 6,537]

I think the message is fine, but it's the delivery that is the problem. I agreed with just about everything Neeld said in the pre-game address shown in round two, his delivery of that message was just down right awkward and awful.

Perhaps he didn't agree with the media coming into the room? Remember, he got stung badly Round 1 last year.

I think he's more savvy that many give him credit. I also believe that he's been mentored on leadership and management.

He needs a chance. Results are not the be all and end all.

[sue 8,473]

I think the message is fine, but it's the delivery that is the problem. I agreed with just about everything Neeld said in the pre-game address shown in round two, his delivery of that message was just down right awkward and awful.

I doubt many of us would give our usual good performance if TV cameras were recording what we said. So I wouldn't judge his ability to address players on that. In PJ's review I trust.

[dimmy 1,143]

Against Hawthorn our players had 1000 less AFL games experience than Hawthorn. (Our most "experienced" player was David Rodan). Actually that side had only 100-200 more games experience than GWS .

Included in GWS was a Midfielder No 1 Draft pick (arent we missing something ! Now a 4th year player) Look at the impact of Ablett on the development of Gold Coast because on the field he makes them play the way they need to play, but Watson is not available nor is Ablett nor Sellwood, Mitchell et al.). I am sure Mark would have loved to had the luxury of being able to throw the Southern Stand at one of them.

When criticising MN , Nathan Jones was a 2 grab player 2 years ago. Look at him now, he is holding (trying) our midfield together. Evans is less than 21 and has missed a year through injury so there is enormous upside to him. As MN has said he has recruited longer term with Toumpas, Hogan and Jack Viney . So we have 3 midfielders (not Hogan) with the potential to be elite Midfielders, plus Trengrove, Grimes,Terlach , Matt Jones. ( I wish I could put Jordie in there just on effort alone !!)

Our defence is getting together with Mc Donald,Frawley ,Garland & Terlach .

Watts will come good ( Look at Tommy Hawkins) .

Our Forward line with Dawes, Clark ,Hogan, "Jumping Jeremy" Howe and the crumbers, Jack W

The future does not look that bad it is just a little further away than we would like !!

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

This week, I restructured my business. I identified the character strengths of my workforce, especially the sales reps, and tailored a role that specifically suits their strengths to maximize there potential output. I also sacked a bloke who was an excuse maker.

Did you sack that negative bugger who runs the place? That'd be a great way to improve employee morale.

It's the way some are wired. It wouldn't matter how bad the incumbent was or the carnage they'd reeked on the club some will always support those in charge. The incumbent gets the sack, they're thanked for the service they gave, and the lemmings get right behind the new coach as though nothing has happened.

Rinse and repeat.

Funny, I look at the anti-Neeld lobby and think virtually the same thing. Some people can't help but look at things in the most negative light and have just gotten into the habit of seeing the club as a failure. If only they could look at things objectively instead of complaining about the fact that we are getting pretty much the results we expected...

Incidentally, could one of the absent Mods please go through this thread and delete the multiple off-topic derailment attempts? There is already a thread about why people want to sack the coach for them to post this rubbish in. They don't need to try to hijack a positive thread about why we need to keep him.

[DemonFrog 1,347]

Did you sack that negative bugger who runs the place? That'd be a great way to improve employee morale.

Funny, I look at the anti-Neeld lobby and think virtually the same thing. Some people can't help but look at things in the most negative light and have just gotten into the habit of seeing the club as a failure. If only they could look at things objectively instead of complaining about the fact that we are getting pretty much the results we expected...

Incidentally, could one of the absent Mods please go through this thread and delete the multiple off-topic derailment attempts? There is already a thread about why people want to sack the coach for them to post this rubbish in. They don't need to try to hijack a positive thread about why we need to keep him.

Censorship !

You know your argument is week if you have to call for the Admin's

[Norm Smith's Curse 2,078]

Part of me wonders what the point of sacking him now would be other than to appease supporters and the media.

more instability, confusion and media conjecture.

I think he is gone myself. I preferred bruise free to pulse free.

[Norm Smith's Curse 2,078]

But the club really has to show that it is ruthless and component I guess. After all once we sacked norm and told Hassa Mann to walk...

[timD 994]

Did you sack that negative bugger who runs the place? That'd be a great way to improve employee morale.

Funny, I look at the anti-Neeld lobby and think virtually the same thing. Some people can't help but look at things in the most negative light and have just gotten into the habit of seeing the club as a failure. If only they could look at things objectively instead of complaining about the fact that we are getting pretty much the results we expected...

Incidentally, could one of the absent Mods please go through this thread and delete the multiple off-topic derailment attempts? There is already a thread about why people want to sack the coach for them to post this rubbish in. They don't need to try to hijack a positive thread about why we need to keep him.

I think the idea that we are getting the results we expected is utterly dishonest. What a pile - who before the year started thought that the bombers was a 148 point loss? Or port was a 13 goal loss-to-be? You are re-writing history to substantiate a position that is untenable. Try not making things up.

And the club is a failure. After 7 years we are still pathetic on-field and disorganised off-field. Which bit is a "success"?

I'd like to think that the case to retain Neeld must, by default, recognise the horror the club had become - otherwise there is no excuse for his shocking record.

[Return to Glory 7,787]

I think the idea that we are getting the results we expected is utterly dishonest. What a pile - who before the year started thought that the bombers was a 148 point loss? Or port was a 13 goal loss-to-be? You are re-writing history to substantiate a position that is untenable. Try not making things up.

And the club is a failure. After 7 years we are still pathetic on-field and disorganised off-field. Which bit is a "success"?

I'd like to think that the case to retain Neeld must, by default, recognise the horror the club had become - otherwise there is no excuse for his shocking record.

I am not a fan of Mark Neeld but, yes, there are some excuses for his poor record ( not completely, but some) - poor administration over a sustained period, poor recruitment and a philosophy that said it was ok to lose games for long term gain. I think you're being a touch over the top IMO.

[junk 342]

Most of it sounds good,don't understand why we got rodan,byrnes,gillies and seller.Pedersen needs more time.Sylvia should go hasn't done enough.Jamar possibly should go.Watts may go.

The 64$ question why is the team worse than last year,on paper I would have expected 8-10 wins.The players don't seen to try.

[jumbo returns 6,537]

Most of it sounds good,don't understand why we got rodan,byrnes,gillies and seller.Pedersen needs more time.Sylvia should go hasn't done enough.Jamar possibly should go.Watts may go.

The 64$ question why is the team worse than last year,on paper I would have expected 8-10 wins.The players don't seen to try.

Absolute bs.

They're just not good enough at sustained pressure and passages of play - yet.

[Return to Glory 7,787]

What's the solution Wayne?

[Strafford 182]

Did you sack that negative bugger who runs the place? That'd be a great way to improve employee morale.

Funny, I look at the anti-Neeld lobby and think virtually the same thing. Some people can't help but look at things in the most negative light and have just gotten into the habit of seeing the club as a failure. If only they could look at things objectively instead of complaining about the fact that we are getting pretty much the results we expected...

Incidentally, could one of the absent Mods please go through this thread and delete the multiple off-topic derailment attempts? There is already a thread about why people want to sack the coach for them to post this rubbish in. They don't need to try to hijack a

positive thread about why we need to keep him.

Where are you going here mate? Do you want the mods to remove the keep the coach posts in the sack Neeld threads as well? A statement is made let the debate begin pro and con.

[Hardnut 327]

Did you sack that negative bugger who runs the place? That'd be a great way to improve employee morale.

Funny, I look at the anti-Neeld lobby and think virtually the same thing. Some people can't help but look at things in the most negative light and have just gotten into the habit of seeing the club as a failure. If only they could look at things objectively instead of complaining about the fact that we are getting pretty much the results we expected...

Incidentally, could one of the absent Mods please go through this thread and delete the multiple off-topic derailment attempts? There is already a thread about why people want to sack the coach for them to post this rubbish in. They don't need to try to hijack a positive thread about why we need to keep him.

Well 'Ralph', I have made it clear that I do not think MN should remain coach, but I reject your assumption that I am negative. On the contrary, I am looking forward positively to a future without MN and without the current Board. I believe many of the players on our list have much to contribute - I think that's being positive, unlike some posters who

(negatively) want the players to bear all of the responsibility!

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

I think the idea that we are getting the results we expected is utterly dishonest. What a pile - who before the year started thought that the bombers was a 148 point loss? Or port was a 13 goal loss-to-be? You are re-writing history to substantiate a position that is untenable. Try not making things up.

And the club is a failure. After 7 years we are still pathetic on-field and disorganised off-field. Which bit is a "success"?

I'd like to think that the case to retain Neeld must, by default, recognise the horror the club had become - otherwise there is no excuse for his shocking record.

That's precisely it. After 7 years. The club was terrible before Neeld came on board. People are blaming him for things that happened before he was even here. People keep raising things that have nothing to do with Neeld as part of their reasoning for why they want him gone.

As for the results we expected, the only one I didn't expect was the loss to Port, and that is because I rated them as a worse basket case than us. The magnitude of the losses has upset me, but I always thought we would see a horrible win-loss ration up to the half-way point. Before the season started I thought we were probably ahead of Port and GWS and a 50-50 shot against GC and the Lions. As it happens, we were further off the pace than that, but looking at the draw we've had I don't think any of those losses were not predictable except for the Port one. Did ANYONE have them improving to that degree this year? We have an easier run in the second half and I think, like last year, this is where we will see the majority of our wins.

Well 'Ralph', I have made it clear that I do not think MN should remain coach, but I reject your assumption that I am negative. On the contrary, I am looking forward positively to a future without MN and without the current Board. I believe many of the players on our list have much to contribute - I think that's being positive, unlike some posters who

(negatively) want the players to bear all of the responsibility!

I was merely responding to the assumption that all those who want Neeld to stay are mindlessly repeating the same patterns without any thought. Goose, Gander, etc. Oddly enough, I like to think that there are people who are capable of looking at the whole picture and drawing logical conclusions, even if they draw one opposed to my own. I just don't see that from the majority of the anti-Neeld lobby on these boards. I see a great deal of poor logic and flawed analysis spurred on by an overly emotional response to a series of losses that many of us saw coming but few thought would be quite as heavy as they have been. I don't deny we are worse than I had hoped to see, but I see plenty in the team to give me hope.

[Hannibal 5,814]

I think the idea that we are getting the results we expected is utterly dishonest. What a pile - who before the year started thought that the bombers was a 148 point loss? Or port was a 13 goal loss-to-be? You are re-writing history to substantiate a position that is untenable. Try not making things up.

And the club is a failure. After 7 years we are still pathetic on-field and disorganised off-field. Which bit is a "success"?

I'd like to think that the case to retain Neeld must, by default, recognise the horror the club had become - otherwise there is no excuse for his shocking record.

Classic Mark Nerd: push out the door experience (+50 games) and then complain about the age and experience of the list the next year.

Classic Mark Nerd: say during your speech at the commencement dinner not to listen to the media, because we're not as far away as people think and then state that it will be 5 years before we're competitive as the losses mount.

Classic Mark Nerd: say after round 1 "we didn't see that coming" and weeks later when things have only got worse state "we're exactly where I thought we'd be and I told the Board we'd be when they appointed me".

Classic Mark Nerd: walk into the club and tell the players "I don't want you to like me". So of course he gets no emotional buy in and now he's running around giving them cuddles because he realises how fragmented the group is.

Classic Mark Nerd: alienate the senior players by demoting them from the leadership group and install two young captains that don't need the burden and haven't earned the right. What better way to fragment a group of people.

This guy is one sick puppy. But smart enough to delude some on here.

Edited June 9, 2013 by Ben-Hur

[dazzledavey36 49,170]

Spot on BH.

[sue 8,473]

Classic Mark Nerd: push out the door experience (+50 games) and then complain about the age and experience of the list the next year.

Classic Mark Nerd: say during your speech at the commencement dinner not to listen to the media, because we're not as far away as people think and then state that it will be 5 years before we're competitive as the losses mount.

Classic Mark Nerd: say after round 1 "we didn't see that coming" and weeks later when things have only got worse state "we're exactly where I thought we'd be and I told the Board we'd be when they appointed me".

Classic Mark Nerd: walk into the club and tell the players "I don't want you to like me". So of course he gets no emotional buy in and now he's running around giving them cuddles because he realises how fragmented the group is.

Classic Mark Nerd: alienate the senior players by demoting them from the leadership group and install two young captains that don't need the burden and haven't earned the right. What better way to fragment a group of people.

This guy is one sick puppy. But smart enough to delude some on here.

I'm deluded enough to know that several of your points are just off-beam regardless of whether Neeld is a disaster or not. There may be plenty of reasons to criticise MN, but you have let off a few squibs. For example:

There is nothing inconsistent about sacking older players and then stating (not complaining) as a reason for poor performance that the team is young. One may disagree with the policy of sacking the older players, but it's not the inconsistency you are trying to make out.

"I don't want you to like me" is classic coach speak. Of course it's good if this is later followed by 'love', so criticise him for failing to develop that, not for the standard coach-speak statement.

The Captain's were chosen by the players - would you want him to ruin their buy-in by overruling them? Personally I think it was a mistake on his part not to do so. If he had done that you'd be able to add to your list that "failure to listen to the players".

In PJ's review I trust, and not on what I read here.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

Mark Nerd - classic. I like that.

[DemonFrog 1,347]

Classic Mark Nerd: push out the door experience (+50 games) and then complain about the age and experience of the list the next year.

Classic Mark Nerd: say during your speech at the commencement dinner not to listen to the media, because we're not as far away as people think and then state that it will be 5 years before we're competitive as the losses mount.

Classic Mark Nerd: say after round 1 "we didn't see that coming" and weeks later when things have only got worse state "we're exactly where I thought we'd be and I told the Board we'd be when they appointed me".

Classic Mark Nerd: walk into the club and tell the players "I don't want you to like me". So of course he gets no emotional buy in and now he's running around giving them cuddles because he realises how fragmented the group is.

Classic Mark Nerd: alienate the senior players by demoting them from the leadership group and install two young captains that don't need the burden and haven't earned the right. What better way to fragment a group of people.

This guy is one sick puppy. But smart enough to delude some on here.

I can tell you are holding back, please feel free to tell us all what you really think of Mr Neeld.

There is only four points that you have raised in your post, I will love to hear more but please want to after todays Collingwood game as there will be so much more material for you to use.

[Hannibal 5,814]

I'm deluded enough to know that several of your points are just off-beam regardless of whether Neeld is a disaster or not. There may be plenty of reasons to criticise MN, but you have let off a few squibs. For example:

There is nothing inconsistent about sacking older players and then stating (not complaining) as a reason for poor performance that the team is young. One may disagree with the policy of sacking the older players, but it's not the inconsistency you are trying to make out.

"I don't want you to like me" is classic coach speak. Of course it's good if this is later followed by 'love', so criticise him for failing to develop that, not for the standard coach-speak statement.

The Captain's were chosen by the players - would you want him to ruin their buy-in by overruling them? Personally I think it was a mistake on his part not to do so. If he had done that you'd be able to add to your list that "failure to listen to the players".

In PJ's review I trust, and not on what I read here.

This business of the players appointing the captains is another joke. I don't believe it, but if it is true it's pathetic. Do new young recruits have the same voting rights as a 100 game player ? Someone with no games has the equivalent value in their vote ? Would that person relate more to someone their own age ?

The coach of the club should be appointing the captain. The players should have input, but the final say is the coach's.

Maybe it's just another case of classic Mark Nerd.

And yes, players leave clubs, but Moloney was pushed out the door and I reckon Rivers would have been a strong chance to stay if Nerd wasn't the coach.

[DemonOX 8,550]

Classic Mark Nerd: push out the door experience (+50 games) and then complain about the age and experience of the list the next year.

Classic Mark Nerd: say during your speech at the commencement dinner not to listen to the media, because we're not as far away as people think and then state that it will be 5 years before we're competitive as the losses mount.

Classic Mark Nerd: say after round 1 "we didn't see that coming" and weeks later when things have only got worse state "we're exactly where I thought we'd be and I told the Board we'd be when they appointed me".

Classic Mark Nerd: walk into the club and tell the players "I don't want you to like me". So of course he gets no emotional buy in and now he's running around giving them cuddles because he realises how fragmented the group is.

Classic Mark Nerd: alienate the senior players by demoting them from the leadership group and install two young captains that don't need the burden and haven't earned the right. What better way to fragment a group of people.

This guy is one sick puppy. But smart enough to delude some on here.

No knee jerk reactions please bh!!!!

We need to give it time!

[mjt 640]

This threads a joke, if I performed 1day out of 35 I would be sacked, any man that backs this guys vision is a fool.

[dazzledavey36 49,170]

I still cannot believe there are people on here that still defend Mark Neeld yet got the balls to say bailey was far worse LOL

[What 18,810]

Neeld is bloody terrible

Cant believe anyone wants to keep him

Hes killing our club